Anyone else surprised that no one has come out with a Tesla destination charger for J1772

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
SageBrush said:
Your argument about federal dollars is disingenuous for two reasons:
1. The federal subsidy is through the car purchase program. It has nothing to do with chargers. Do you criticize Nissan for using that same subsidy but not installing destination chargers AT ALL ? The same goes for Toyota, Fiat, etc.
Well, in the hope that you are simply ill informed, rather than disingenuous, I'm not referring to the the $7500 car purchase program (another government program I'm not wild about as its a tax subsidy for the wealthy (even when Nissan gives it back to customer who lease a car, the company still gets the sale and the car is, as are most new cars, still too expensive for the majority), I'm referring to the now over $5 billion his companies have received in various government incentive programs. One can debate the value to society of that money (not for this thread) but not that the fact that Teslas are built with a great deal of tax dollars but the end product is something only the very rich can afford. Yes, most all companies get various federal subsidies, but they at least make some products /services that can be purchased/used by people outside the top 1% in incomes.

SageBrush said:
2. EVs are around 1% of car buyers. The other 99% do not benefit from the EVSEs at all but pay into the pot to set up public L2 charging stations. That does not bother you, does it ?
Funny, I thought EVs benefited everyone by their mere existence! (that comment was sarcastic in case that escaped you). Where I live there are no government provided charging stations (but some electric companies have put in some that no doubt were subsidized by some federal program) but I'm not sure what I would object to. I think its great when government monies (i.e., dollars collected from mostly middle and upper middle class income people) is used to help fund new technologies that benefit the public. A used LEAF is a relatively affordable (but very limited car) that would be made more useful to more people (especially people of modest means whom to date have been shut out of the EV market) with available low-cost public charging. In Indy, lots of my tax dollars went to fund an electric car short-term rental program which helps people get around the city without having to own a car. I could not be more thrilled to have my tax dollars used that way. I just object when the output of my tax dollars is to produce stuff exclusively for the top 1%. That's just redistribution from the those of more modest means to the the extremely wealthy. Call me crazy for objecting to that.

SageBrush said:
Apologies for the harsh tone. Hypocrisy annoys me.
Disingenuous apologies are just that. Perhaps you could specify what you found so hypocritical (rather than it just being you objecting to someone holding a somewhat negative opinion of the Tesla motor company) that pushed you to a harshness against your nature.
 
@jpadc wrote " I'm referring to the now over $5 billion his companies have received in various government incentive programs."

Do you have anything to back up your statement ?

Ahh... perhaps you rely on this ?
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html
I suggest you READ the article.
 
SageBrush said:
I suggest you READ the article.
I did, again, instead of being vague, make your argument, point out where I'm wrong..

"But public subsidies for Musk's companies stand out both for the amount, relative to the size of the companies, and for their dependence on them."

"They shored up the deal with an agreement to give Tesla $195 million in transferable tax credits, which the automaker could sell for upfront cash."

"What he didn't say: Tesla has already secured a commitment of $126 million in California subsidies to companies developing energy storage technology."

And to date, he builds cars ONLY for people who are in the 1%.

I can speculate too.. Maybe you are relying on "Musk wrote in 2008... When someone buys the Tesla Roadster sports car, they are actually helping to pay for the development of the low-cost family car." Basically he says all this tax money which did nothing for the environment (his words) will one day benefit the masses... Well, when it actually exists, I might think otherwise. In the mean time, I think its tax dollars not well invested. If you want to think they are well invested, feel free to disagree - but don't argue I'm wrong to believe its not been such a great investment.
 
jpadc said:
SageBrush said:
I suggest you READ the article.
I did, again, instead of being vague, make your argument, point out where I'm wrong..
Sigh...

You are not just wrong, you are ideologically blinded.
E.g.
The $5B number included the tax breaks Nevada gives Tesla for bring thousands of jobs to Nevada
The $5B number includes the tax break *consumers* receive for installing PV
The $5B number includes loans that have been repaid
The $5B number includes money other gas guzzler manufacturers pay Tesla for CARB credits

Is anything left ?
 
This thread is about a J1772 adapter, in the section of the forum dedicated to accessories and mods. Would you guys please take your subsidy squabble somewhere else?
 
SageBrush said:
You are not just wrong, you are ideologically blinded.
This is great, so we agree completely with my statement that "so far, Tesla has used a lot of federal dollars to make vehicles exclusively for the 1%.

The $5B number included the tax breaks Nevada gives Tesla for bring thousands of jobs to Nevada
i.e. tax dollars used by Tesla to reduce the actual labor costs to build Teslas.
The $5B number includes the tax break *consumers* receive for installing PV
as I said, I think this is a dumb tax break for the wealthy even when Nissan passes it on in leases, but its still tax dollars used to subsidize the real the costs of building Teslas.
The $5B number includes loans that have been repaid
i.e. Tax dollars used rather than private equity that would have required higher rates of return and required more than just repayment (like preferred stock) - so again, tax dollars used to help build Teslas.
The $5B number includes money other gas guzzler manufacturers pay Tesla for CARB credits
i.e., CARB regulations are taxes charged to other manufactures which in reality are dollars that come out of the pocket of the buyers of those cars [people of normal means] in higher costs. So again, tax dollars used to help build Teslas

So we agree I'm right (rather than wrong) about Tesla getting a lot of tax subsidies. Note I also indicated that I'm well aware lots of other companies get various tax breaks and subsidies too, but not so they can make something that only the rich can buy. So you have called me dumb (can't read), a hypocrite, and an ideolog simply because we disagree on the extent to which its a good idea to invest a lot of tax dollars in a company that makes a product exclusively for the very rich. Its okay to have different opinions on this issue. I can respect yours while disagreeing and do it without the sarcasm, harsh tones, and name calling.

But perhaps LoLRich and this is to off topic so I'll quit.
 
@jpadc,
Your reasoning is amusing, but you should try for consistency:

If you want to hang the PV consumer rebate around Tesla's (and every other EV manufacturer) neck, you should hang the externalized costs of fossil fuel use around the neck of ICE manufacturers.
 
I understand why Tesla makes their chargers Tesla-only, my main concern is the confusion. There are SO MANY EV charging standards now, and apparently some folks are having Destination chargers installed without understanding how that locks them in to Tesla (and excludes BMW, Nissan, Chevrolet, etc.)

I just wish we could *pay* to use the Tesla chargers. I'm not looking for a handout - just EV advancement in general.
 
@jpadc I am not sure where you came up with the statistic that only the " top 1%" can buy a Tesla. My wife an I purchased one less than two months ago. We now have 10,000 miles on it with 4 long trips, including a 16-day cross-country trip from San Diego to OH to GA to FL to San Diego. We used lots of Superchargers and one Tesla Destination Charger during this trip. While staying with my brother in south-east GA rather than try to plug into a 120v circuit I got permission to use the J1772 at a local Nissan dealer. It is only used by their one Leaf courtesy vehicle and on occasion by one of their handful of Leaf customers. They were happy to let me use it, just excited that someone could take a cross country trip in an EV. Rather than plug it in during the day I ended up driving over the night before we left at closing time and left it there overnight.

Now to the point. All of the other Tesla drivers we met on our trip were like us, just regular folks that work for a living or are now retired or semi-retired, and got their Tesla so they could take long road trips and not worry about running out of "fuel". All love that Tesla not only built an EV with long range that can charge quickly, but built and are expanding a charging network that will actually work for road trips. The current Leaf, along with almost all other EV's out there are just not practical for a 6,000 mile trip. As our 75kw battery was charging we would usually stop at 50% to 70% (depending on how far it is to the next Supercharger). The charging speed starts at around 100kw to about 50% then ramps down the closer you get to 100% . Once the charging speed reached twice that of the DCFC it was too slow for us. We did charge to 90% a few times, but waiting for that much slower speed was because we were doing something else (ie. eating). Most of the time we would plug in, find a restroom, walk around a few minutes to get the blood flowing to our legs and feet, then unplug and be on our way. It was a wonderful trip in a wonderful car and we enjoyed it very much. It really did not slow us down from when we drove ICE. Even then we would stop every 1 to 2 hours for potty breaks and walk around a few minutes before continuing. What did slow us down a little was talking to non-EV folks about the joys of driving electric. We got lots of questions along the way, even from family that we visited with.

Tesla pays for the Destination chargers, and finds the various hosts to support them for the convenience of Tesla drivers on long over-night trips. The only non-tesla EV drivers that could use them to recharge would be local owners who can recharge at their own homes or use other available J1772 charging station. The only Tesla driver that would use a Tesla destination charger would be for overnight stay. The speed is too slow for anything else. A non-Tesla EV using a Tesla destination charger would be like an ICE blocking the one DCFC you planned to use on your short trip out of your local area. It was just after midnight when we arrived at the destination charger. Fortunately it was unused so I parked and plugged in. If it had been blocked, we planned to drive to the next Supercharger the next morning to charge. In this case we did not need to use it.

If Nissan, or BMW, or Mercedes, or whoever, wishes to provide a charging network for their customers they are free to do so. Tesla has even invited these other EV car makers to join the Tesla Supercharger network but none have been interested.

We LOVED our Leaf but it was never going to be able to make these long trips. Just for fun we did take a 115 mile each way road trip when it was about 2 months old. It was a 13 hour trip, including about 3 hours at our destination. It would have been about 6 hours in our ICE. Now, because of the Tesla Supercharger network we can make the same trip in about the same time as the ICE. jmho
 
Graffi said:
@jpadc I am not sure where you came up with the statistic that only the " top 1%" can buy a Tesla.
In 2016, the top 1% of incomes was right at $390k nationally (in San Diego you needed more like $428k). The cheapest Tesla is around $75K out the door (fees, taxes, plates) but sales of actual cars are much higher than the base price. So if you are just barely in the 1%, that base car costs almost 20% of your annual income. If you have to borrow money to buy it, it costs even more. People are free to spend their money how they like, but if your annual income is much less than $390k and you choose to buy a Tesla, that's great for you and your wife. I just don't think many families can spend that high a % of their income on a single car. Even the Model 3 looks like will really end up selling for well more than the base $35K. Most people can't afford a $35K car either, but at least its a car for the top 5%, not just the top 1%.
 
jpadc said:
Graffi said:
@jpadc I am not sure where you came up with the statistic that only the " top 1%" can buy a Tesla.
In 2016, the top 1% of incomes was right at $390k nationally (in San Diego you needed more like $428k). The cheapest Tesla is around $75K out the door (fees, taxes, plates) but sales of actual cars are much higher than the base price. So if you are just barely in the 1%, that base car costs almost 20% of your annual income. If you have to borrow money to buy it, it costs even more. People are free to spend their money how they like, but if your annual income is much less than $390k and you choose to buy a Tesla, that's great for you and your wife. I just don't think many families can spend that high a % of their income on a single car. Even the Model 3 looks like will really end up selling for well more than the base $35K. Most people can't afford a $35K car either, but at least its a car for the top 5%, not just the top 1%.

We are way below the $390k (or $428k) that you stated. I believe you are over-thinking this. Is there anyone in your neighborhood with a Motor home parked in the driveway or beside their home? Any neighbors with a big boat parked in their yard? Do you have one? In our case, our Tesla is our motor home or boat, only we are able to drive it every day, and take trips in it without spending LOTS and LOTS of money on gas. Yes, it was a stretch for us, but we felt that it was a much better investment for our retirement years of travel than a motor home.

One lady we met at a supercharger was a retired school teacher from MA that was on her way home from visiting her brother in OR. Her Model S 90D was only a few months old but already was on her second cross-country trip. This was her second Tesla as she had put well over 100,000 miles on her first one, and wanted to get the latest with the HW-2 and AP-2. As a retired teacher I can not believe she is anywhere close to the top 1%.

It is all a matter of perspective. Those people who justify a motor home or boat for their leisure are no different than someone who will purchase a Tesla. It would be interesting to see the statistics of the financial situation of Tesla owners, but I suspect that a vast majority of them are the working upper-middle class, not the "1 percenters". jmho
 
There are some pretty intense and outlandish claims folks have made in this thread....
You folks understand that Tesla doesn't get to decide who charges at a destination charger, right? It's the owner of the business/location who decides. From an end user perspective, there is nothing more.

The business/location might have some sort of agreement with Tesla, but it's their choice to allow or disallow you access. If that violates some civil agreement between the location owner and Tesla, that has absolutely nothing to do with you and isn't your business.

You're not doing anything illegal or wrong.
This isn't about Superchargers. That situation would be completely different.
 
Back
Top